Received: by 2002:ac0:8c9a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id r26csp132578ima; Fri, 1 Feb 2019 00:32:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN537s3aQLkV1RTJ0DKYMPw/0ftpYlcBCVLy9X/CyA1/l3+MQgk7UALB8CB1c/g4afyy2uqV X-Received: by 2002:a62:1e45:: with SMTP id e66mr38020736pfe.152.1549009970905; Fri, 01 Feb 2019 00:32:50 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1549009970; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=KCHxkkSS+k2A00AMjxSWDbSAr410p671aHZ0RtpX6x4QVm+bN7csG8JWWoqeFlC3io 2TRgNsZN4rzflAq3IJk6TaqttDlPAdzDH+GG0Fc+vyHaSqeGW6taWebVt1yUoq4RZUrB zVEnwz/aOlqSUHMCWM55yp6gBG344p8qbHhxXq05klf2JQAg2WRMrxwg+sMgmDfgy3AW cy4iDo/MNtsDprfLLh3mw/yglN46SrLsqxYHAPlzjwGwdEkMe8UEpdpN8vSiZn1pZ1Ex ZSu2IkOGxexEXjN4mF5meZ0VZkMZLC7C/DZxlAt5ZltQKfij7F7zvCsBpIYnvDxR8kNu 2mWw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=IFKUUfBqqG/4tjQtoQmECoKvHHfxI47v9OHnT1BWMMw=; b=dba2zDa+3lGDqM9O1RzL3QwOmTPzaksGFHQ4atMoUQywDSZ9z260P/BTty12lU68Gp Jwomzmls5DcrhS9W5RY9fR/9vrOyREy2cjWbqAqsTMbNttHYb3Nn+WfS+1zy8QOf2Rei h/9WFUD1c5dtyAKkOKw1m2lqm8LwPuTgn/czmNT6Tg59VSvNSUnPFkr6tdZabuYcCPpu Lrz6KgsXJbRw73AYpDri/cYxNES4IhkC3PhDwOFtFPdzgInZRvHgENjmwiWGHjoaZb7S lcBBJXs8YargHs/KHPZ4k9Boog9mHEkhjFb27m8ciDM9TENk5mDfF55FYYdXyV1gRxXC KVuw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id d65si40367pfc.201.2019.02.01.00.32.35; Fri, 01 Feb 2019 00:32:50 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729407AbfBAIby (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 1 Feb 2019 03:31:54 -0500 Received: from szxga07-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.35]:49500 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726526AbfBAIbw (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Feb 2019 03:31:52 -0500 Received: from DGGEMS407-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 20CD6C916FF1BD67CEA3; Fri, 1 Feb 2019 16:31:50 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.151.21.212) by DGGEMS407-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.207) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.408.0; Fri, 1 Feb 2019 16:31:44 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: android: ion: fix sys heap pool's gfp_flags To: Dan Carpenter CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <1549004386-38778-1-git-send-email-saberlily.xia@hisilicon.com> <20190201081530.GC14343@kadam> From: "Xiaqing (A)" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 16:30:53 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190201081530.GC14343@kadam> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.151.21.212] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019/2/1 16:15, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 02:59:46PM +0800, Qing Xia wrote: >> In the first loop, gfp_flags will be modified to high_order_gfp_flags, >> and there will be no chance to change back to low_order_gfp_flags. >> >> Fixes: e7f63771 ("ION: Sys_heap: Add cached pool to spead up cached buffer alloc") > > Huh... Presumably you found this bug just by reading the code. I > wonder how it affects runtime? > The problem is that when I found that there was no page allocation failure warning after the failure of the ion alloc in my test, and then I found the problem of gfp_flags. regards, Qing > regards, > dan carpenter > > > . >